Jump to content
TD-40

Why Patterson And Gimlim Were Successful That Day.

Recommended Posts

Backdoc

P/G won't disappear when sasquatch is confirmed; rather, Roger Patterson will take his place among the great heroes of the natural sciences.  At least one scientist has already said that.

 

The point is that we don't have to kill one in order to act as if there's a host of possibilities we could be wrong about this.  Were an analysis like the proponent analyses of P/G done in astronomy or paleoanthropology, the findings would be close to a slam dunk, and the skeptical demurrers would be about as prominent as moon-made-of-green-cheese.

 

In other words:  that we are still talking about having to kill one of these to prove they aren't guys in suits is an indictment of the scientific mainstream.  It's not the way they treat anything else like this.

 

 

 

Very true.  If Patty Proven real it will be housed in the Patterson Gimlin museum of Natural Wildlife.

 

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The only option I see here is to have a video going all the time, front and back. Sometimes people 'surprise' them. Its rare, but that is the only way to get one on tape very well is to surprise them, and you can't plan it.

 

One youtube vid showed the guy using a mirror to get the (blurry) video, it was 300 feet away at least. So even at distances, only by using a mirror was he able to get anything. Just another possible peice of the puzzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Science or not.

 

It reminds me of an NFL game where the Refs (experts on the football field) make a call. and the viewer who is not a ref screams "NO NO way"  sometimes you have to take the 5 drunks in a bar criteria.  If 5 drunks in a bar think there was a fumble then there might well indeed be a fumble.  Even though the refs are experts the 5 drunks at the bar get to see the same replay as these experts who might make a different call. Now, the 5 drunks at the bar might indeed be right.

 

As far as science goes I can say I have been involved in human mvts and dissection, biomechanics and so on.  So I can say pretty clearly what I see in this film as far as human movement is concerned.  I think it was Grieve from England who said more or less he goes back and fourth between total rejection and total acceptance of the film.  He also tells of an Emotional component to the viewing of the PG film.

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor

P/G won't disappear when sasquatch is confirmed; rather, Roger Patterson will take his place among the great heroes of the natural sciences. At least one scientist has already said that.

The point is that we don't have to kill one in order to act as if there's a host of possibilities we could be wrong about this. Were an analysis like the proponent analyses of P/G done in astronomy or paleoanthropology, the findings would be close to a slam dunk, and the skeptical demurrers would be about as prominent as moon-made-of-green-cheese.

In other words: that we are still talking about having to kill one of these to prove they aren't guys in suits is an indictment of the scientific mainstream. It's not the way they treat anything else like this.

I disagree. The people on this forum will honor him but the average american? They wont.

I also disagree that they dont treat other cryptids in the same fashion because they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

Oh, I'm not talking about other cryptids, none of which has the volume and depth of evidence that this one does.

 

The scientific reaction to P/G just wasn't kosher.  It showed a significant lack of attention to what was already a sizable volume of evidence.

 

I think that Patterson and Gimlin will see a major public renaissance.  I just hope Gimlin's around to see it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Here is why Roger and Bob were successful that day.  Blocked by fallen trees, they came upon Patty kneeling by the flowing water.  Listen to this video of a creek like Bluff Creek and tell me you could hear someone coming:

 

 

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

There it is.  Set up a blind along a creek in a known BF habitat and voila!  So we should expect a type specimen in say...a week or two?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Can we please not use sarcasm to get our opinions on the table? Thanks a bunch! Admin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

denialist

 

The only point being made, one in which you may agree, involves the noise of a same or similar creek.  A creek like that would result in a loud roar.  That is enough to consider that point in answering the Q posed in this thread, 'Why P and G where successful that day?"   I am trying to answer that question.  There might even be some who agree with my concept.

 

When you view the PGF there is no sound in it.  By showing the video I posted I am trying to show some perspective in the type of conditions in play when the PGF was shot.  Some who have not pondered the idea.  My point might make them consider these were not just 2 cowboys who snuck up on a shy creature in her element in dead silence.   

 

Backdoc

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

Bluff Creek was quite noisy when I was there in October of 2000. One could have driven a big rig up behind me and I could not have heard it coming. Your point was well demonstrated and you saw what it was countered with. Take it for what it was worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Let's say someone is a skeptic.   Could a skeptic discuss the concept of an 'animal' being surprised?  What reasons might they be surprised?  We hear the skeptics say how we need to prove this or that.  Since this is a discussion of the PGF, I think offering points that support the common sense of the events of that day might be a helpful discussion.  I think the tree cover as well as the sound of the creek give a plausible explanation showing how they may have stumbled upon a shy creature.

 

Are we to think if the PGF was shot in a location that was so quiet you could hear a pin drop and so open you could see 2 cowboys coming from a mile away such a point would be ignored by the skeptics?

 

I have heard on one of the Bigfoot Shows how an animal just walking away is 'curious'   Yet, my own observations of any animal I have ever come across in the woods and so on has always been just that.  These may be Iowa woods in my case. 

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HOLDMYBEER
BFF Donor

The ambient noise in combination with a blind approach may have made the difference. One thing though....I have a feral dog that always avoids blind corners. I walk her with my other dogs but she alone will always approach blindspots at the end of the leash in a fashion to see around the corner. She always walks so as to maximize her ability to avoid surprise. She doesn't drop her head to eat when she can't see in all directions. We feed her in open spaces where she eats alone.  I will spare you the details but life has been pretty unusual with her.

 

And now with age she cannot hear. Life with her is becoming more difficult as she doesn't see all that well and now doesn't trust her hearing. Walking her has always been unpredictable but now even eating is hit and miss. She is a wild animal and that hasn't changed in the 6 years she has been with us.

 

The point here is the PGF creature apparently put herself where she couldn't see the approach of P-G, couldn't hear their approach and then becomes preoccupied with something at water's edge in broad daylight. Just an observation.

Edited by HOLDMYBEER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I am positing a theory that I would like your opinion on.

If P-G had been hiking on foot that day, they would not have gotten so close to Patty because she would have been alerted to them approaching and would have probably taken flight much sooner...

So what do you think? I think P-G had their successful encounter because Patty did not recognize them as humans which allowed them to get eerily close to her. If they had been hiking on foot, the experience never would have happened because Patty would have left the area or would have hidden and observed them from afar. Being on horseback is what allowed them to get so close to her because she did not yet recognize them as humans.

 

I think the reason they were successful (if they were successful) was because Patty was hiking on foot that day.  Had Patty been on a horse, the film we know as the PGF would be a whole lot different.  Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^^

 

Or, had she been riding on Nessie... :haha:

Edited by AaronD
to remove quote of post directly before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

 

 

Let's say someone is a skeptic.   Could a skeptic discuss the concept of an 'animal' being surprised? 

 

 

Let me share a flawed skeptic view. 

 

It was a skeptic that said that Patterson and Gimlin gave conflicting statements as to the creatures position upon seeing it. The complaint was that Roger said it was squatted by the creek and Gimlin said it was standing. The result in the skeptics mind was a smoking gun had been discovered. Did the skeptic consider any other rational alternatives ... it doesn't seem so.

 

Alternative:   Roger was on horseback walking just ahead of Gimlin who was also on horseback and leading the pack-horse. Roger rounds the root system and he and his horse see the creature squatted at the stream. Gimlin has yet to round the the root system and doesn't know yet what the commotion is all about. As Gimlin starts to round the overturned root system, the creature has stood up, which would make sense to me. To assume Roger and Bob saw the creature at the exact same moment is to assume they were riding on the same horse or were riding side by side as they rounded the overturned root system is being presumptuous at best.. However, the official story had Roger just ahead of Bob which allowed the creature time to react to the spooked horse by standing up from a squatting position.

 

Did the skeptic consider a rational alternative before jumping to there being a smoking gun ... you tell me.

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...